Ms. Conrad
Witness/Juror being questioned
Mentioned in 53 documents. Roles: Witness/Juror being questioned, witness testifying in the case, Witness testifying in the case, Witness being deposed, juror observed by Brune during the trial
Ms. Conrad is mentioned in documents or reporting related to the Epstein case. Being mentioned does not imply any wrongdoing, criminal conduct, or inappropriate behavior.
At a Glance
Click values for sourcesSources
5 sources for document mentions
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer wi...
“Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer wi”
The document is a deposition transcript where Ms. Conrad is being questioned about her financial sit...
“The document is a deposition transcript where Ms. Conrad is being questioned about her financial sit”
Deposition Transcript: 120-ec1-00330-PAE
“The witness, Conrad, is being questioned about her husband's criminal history, which she allegedly c”
court transcript: 120-ec1-006308-PA
“This is a transcript of the direct testimony of Conrad in the case United States of America v. Paul ”
Court Transcript: 120-ecf-006308
“The document appears to be a page from a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, featuring the dir”
Sources
1 source for known connections
Co-Document Mentions
“Named alongside other network members in 131 documents”
Known Connections (17)
Document Mentions (57)
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer wi...
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer with the same name as Juror No. 1. She explains that they didn't bring it to the court's attention because they deemed it inconceivable that Juror No. 1 was the suspended lawyer. There was no discussion about raising a juror misconduct issue in a post-trial motion until after receiving a letter from Ms. Conrad.
The document is a deposition transcript where Ms. Conrad is being questioned about her financial sit...
The document is a deposition transcript where Ms. Conrad is being questioned about her financial situation and credibility. She is asked about her cash on hand, stocks, and bonds, as well as her tax filing history. The questioning attorney attempts to challenge her credibility and financial disclosure.
Deposition Transcript: 120-ec1-00330-PAE
The witness, Conrad, is being questioned about her husband's criminal history, which she allegedly concealed during voir dire. She is also questioned about her father's employment with the Justice Department and her own involvement in a disciplinary proceeding, which she failed to disclose.
court transcript: 120-ec1-006308-PA
This is a transcript of the direct testimony of Conrad in the case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., on February 15, 2012. The case appears to involve allegations of tax shelter fraud. The testimony is part of the court record.
Court Transcript: 120-ecf-006308
The document appears to be a page from a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, featuring the direct testimony of a witness named Conrad in the case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.
court transcript or deposition: 120ec1-006308-PA
The document appears to be a transcript of the direct testimony of Conrad in the case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., on February 15, 2012. The testimony is part of a larger court proceeding. The specific details of Conrad's testimony are not clear from the provided snippet.
Deposition Transcript: 120ec1-006308-PAE
This is a page from the deposition transcript of Conrad in the case against Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., in the Southern District court. The document is part of a larger legal proceeding and contains Conrad's direct testimony. The case appears to involve complex financial or tax-related issues.
deposition transcript: 16166201
The deposition transcript details Brune's testimony about their firm's handling of jury selection, their team's responsibilities, and observations of juror behavior during the trial, particularly noting juror Conrad's attentiveness and note-taking.
court filing or legal memorandum: 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 522
The document discusses the lawyers' statements about their reaction to a juror's letter and their investigation into the juror's background, concluding that the statements were true as reasonably read and did not constitute a knowing misrepresentation under Rule 3.3.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 1616-20 Filed 02/24/22 Page 623 of 130
The document is a transcript of the direct examination of Ms. Brune, where she discusses her conversations with defense counsel and the receipt of a jury note. She testifies that she had conversations with co-counsel after receiving a copy of a letter and that the communications were joint defense communications. The witness also mentions being upset upon reading the jury note and verifying information on the Bar website.
deposition: 1:20-cv-00330-PAE
Ms. Brune testifies about a brief she wrote, admitting it missed an important issue and did not accurately represent the timeline of an investigation. She also acknowledges that her colleague, Ms. Trzaskoma, was aware of the investigation but it was not accurately reflected in the brief.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-00330-PAE Document 61102/20
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer with the same name as Juror No. 1. She explains that they didn't bring it to the court's attention because they deemed it inconceivable that Juror No. 1 was the suspended lawyer. There was no discussion about raising a juror misconduct issue in a post-trial motion until after receiving a letter from Ms. Conrad.
Court Decision: 1:20-cv-00338-PAE Document 161 Filed 02/24/22 Page 273 of 117
The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court suspended an attorney (Conrad) from practicing law indefinitely, effective from December 18, 2007, and denied her cross-motion for reinstatement without prejudice to a future motion supported by an expert evaluation of her fitness to practice law.
Court Transcript: 1:20-cv-03038-PAE
The document contains excerpts from a court transcript in the case United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas et al., dated February 15, 2012. It includes testimony from witnesses Conrad and Trzaskoma. The case was heard in the Southern District of New York.
Deposition Transcript: 1:20-cv-30033
The document is a deposition transcript where Ms. Conrad is being questioned about her financial situation and credibility. She is asked about her cash on hand, stocks, and bonds, as well as her tax filing history. The questioning attorney attempts to challenge her credibility and financial disclosure.
Showing 15 of 57 documents. View all →
This dossier on Ms. Conrad was compiled from court records, flight logs, and public documents. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.